Efficacy and safety of a new hyaluronic acid dermal filler in the treatment of moderate nasolabial folds: 6-month interim results of a randomized, evaluator-blinded, intra-individual comparison study

Abstract

Background: Hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers such as Restylane^® are frequently used for the correction of facial soft tissue defects. Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of a novel HA filler, Emervel^® Classic, with those of Restylane in the treatment of moderate nasolabial folds. Methods: This was a split-face, randomized and evaluator-blinded comparison study. Subjects were randomized to receive an injection of Emervel Classic or Restylane on their left or right side. Efficacy was evaluated based on the change in Wrinkle Severity Rating Score (WSRS) from baseline. Local tolerability was assessed based on subject diary, which recorded the severity of erythema, oedema/swelling, bruising, pain/tenderness and pruritus during the first 3 weeks after injection. Results: The interim results 6 months after injection are reported. At week 24, the mean improvement in WSRS from baseline was 0.83 ± 0.51 for Emervel Classic, similar to that for Restylane (0.90 ± 0.57). A similar volume of both fillers was injected. Most local tolerability events were mild and transient. Erythema, oedema/swelling and pain/tenderness were significantly less severe and disappeared faster with Emervel Classic than with Restylane (at least p < 0.05). Conclusion: Emervel Classic provides similar efficacy and better overall local tolerability compared with Restylane 6 months after treatment of moderate nasolabial folds.

Key Words::

• efficacy
• filler
• hyaluronic acid
• safety

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank May MA, PhD for editorial assistance.

Declaration of interest: The investigating authors received payments for conducting this study. Mr. Poncet is an empolyee of Galderma and Mr. Guennoun was an employee of Galderma until study completion.